IM Choo Choo swim wasn't a joke....everyone still had to cover the distance and I lost as much time as I usually do in the swim leaving myself with the same amount of work to do on the bike and the run. No different than strong cyclists or runners whining about the courses that have easier terrain for the bike and the run....pick you race and go do it. If swimmers want one that plays to their strength go do Leadman but pretty weak to come here and call what everyone who competed at Chattanooga did was a joke.

X1

It seems like the popular thing to do these days is jump on the forum after every race and find ways to discount the effort. It's the equivalent of all the folks complaining about the extra 4 miles before the rac.

Race the race you are given. I don't think anyone out there biking the extra miles and running that course felt cheated.

For some, the water was cool enough to swim in with a wetsuit. Unless you deemed the water to be too warm or are fighting to get a Kona slot, you are racing against the clock. The smart choice was to race in a wetsuit. It doesn't matter if you are a poor swimmer or great swimmer, if you are racing against the clock and yourself, the smart choice was to race in a wetsuit. I was shocked that not many more people were wearing the wetsuit.

Let's say that you think that the water was cool enough to be in a wetsuit and you are a normal 1:05 swimmer, with zero shot for a Kona slot. You are just out there to race your fastest race. Why would you be dumb enough to sacrifice speed by getting rid of the wetsuit?

What you stated is as dumb as saying, just how bad of a biker do you have to be, to be on a tri bike with racewheels on a flat course like IMFL. Or, just how bad of a runner do you have to be, to be running in raceflats on a downhill road race.

So, let's say that the water temp yesterday was 76 degrees (wetsuit legal), instead of 77, would all those people wearing wetsuits, including folks vying for Kona slots, be considered really bad swimmers because they wore the wetsuit for this race?

---

__________________________________________________________________________
My marathon PR is "under three, high twos. I had a two hour and fifty-something."

I never called the athletes a joke and it's Ken's thread anyway. I called out WTC for literally watering down the swim leg when they could have just as easily done an out back swim (or at least partially into the current then back) to at least ensure that pro finish times are in line with normal pro finish times....then everything shakes out from there. But we all know why WTC does not want to do out and back swims at river venue, and its because if there is a substantial current, then swim times will be slow, and a large chunk of the field may not even get to the turnaround and need to get pulled.

This is why river venues are problematic wrt to fairness. WTC is trying to balance off business interest while hosting a sporting event. So they don't want to make the swim so tough for the majority of the field that many get dissuaded and don't come back. From a business perspective, they did the correct thing. Today, this race will instantly sell out, and the guys at WTC can laugh at all of us folks who would prefer that the sport does not get watered down.

As for the athletes, they/we (I may have been in Chattanooga this weekend, but business travel/obligations got in the way), do the best we can with the framework WTC gives us. Everyone trained hard and worked hard on race day. No disrespect to a single athlete. My beef, and I believe I am not the only one is with WTC. They knew full well, that there is a chance for a solid current, so they went with the one way swim. Any other form of partial out+downriver back, runs the risk of a large part of the field DNFing. From a business perspective that is bad, but then don't put races in venues where you are forced to water down the sport in the name of business interests. I am pragmatic enough to know that WTC needs to attend to business first, and I am all for them making a ton of money for putting on quality events...hopefully not at the expense of watering down the sporting aspect.

So please don't put words in my mouth. The athletes are all fine individuals. My beef is with organizers on this one and they knew exactly what they were setting up the day the race bid went in with the river swim as a venue of choice.

Based on the comments on the FB page, I would say most expected an easy swim when registering. Many of them have done Augusta and were expecting the same type of swim.

Cozumel advertises a fast swim.

Honestly, I never thought of that perspective, mostly because it doesn't make sense to me. I'm not going to Kona, but I am still competing against the other athletes in the race to see how I stack up. Will I beat 5%? 95%? I'll find out after I give it my best effort on that day in those conditions.

How can I compete against myself? If next year's bike course at Choo is just 112 miles, do I take pride in my improved time? If next year's weather is sunny and 85 (like it was Saturday) do I suck because my time is slower?

There's a reason why WTC doesn't rank you if you wear a wetsuit in a non-wetsuit event. You are not competing in the race. With the conditions so favorable for an easy swim, the only reasons I can think of to wear a wetsuit are: 1. You otherwise couldn't make it. 2. You are extremely close to not finishing by the cutoff.

People, you always find something to criticize. I finished the race yesterday. Yes, the swim was fast, but they only have one river in town. WTC does not control its flow. We had extra four miles on the bike, which totally compensated for the downstream swim, and some very hilly portions of the run. We also had a perfect overcast with cool temps. I think that is where fast times come from.

I did Challenge AC where parts of the swim were into a hellish current. Because of the shape of the course, the current "aid" was not equal. I missed the cutoff at about 2:22. Was that fair to me? Should they have pulled at say the 2.1 mile mark because I had already swam the 2.4 and I was "done"? No. That's absurd.

its being criticized because it isn't the ironman distance. Not only was the swim the wrong distance, the bike was the wrong distance too?

i guess as long as the total adds up to 140.6 its all fine. Whatever.....

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I don't see the current aided swim any different that a wind aided bike split (wind shifts or build on return leg) or a really flat course. It is what it is. But you have to look at the splits from each discipline and compare them appropriately.

For example, in this case it was a moderately hilly bike course but was 4 miles long. So bike splits were similar to a CDA, IMWI time. Run course was very hilly from the sounds of it. Probably in the range of 0:10-0:15/mi slower on average. But weather was mild and overcast.

Truthfully, I don't like easy courses, because when I set a PR, I feel the need personally to put an asterisk after it. Same with my position in my age group. On the bike, I tend to look at my power file and evaluate how strong my ride was or wasn't more than the time.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

How many of you criticizing the swim were there yesterday? That's what I thought.

Four extra miles on the bike. Was with a buddy who has done 9 different courses and he said, without a doubt, it's the toughest run he has seen. Conditions couldn't have been much better and it lead to incredibly fast times.

It's unbelievable how everyone finds something to bitch about (me included obviously). Asterisk next to IMChoo. Unbelievable.

for real? swim times were give or take about 20% faster. when was the last time you saw an ironman bike split, 20% faster than the norm due to it being wind aided? that would be the equivalent of a pro who normally rides a 4:30, going sub 3:40.

Here is one other important angle as a fan. Does Angela Naeth's sub 9 hour time mean anything in the context of the all time women greats for who sub 9 is fairly rarified territory? Sadly for Angela, we end up discounting this performance somewhat. Yes, it is race win, but pro woman will give her credit for a sub 9, which really is too bad for her. The reality is that she would be really close to sub 9 on an accurate course. She would probably swim 10-12 min slower and ride 10-12 min faster. Bummer.

You are absolutely right Dev. Even on congested courses it is completely possibe to ride legal. It may take some pride-swallowing, but it is not that complicated.

My group was at app. mile 50 (and 100?) of the bike yesterday and watching the drafting was painful, especially with some of the faster riders.

---

--------------------------------------------------------
John Behme
Charlotte, NC

Whats amazing to me is how this board blows up after every IM. Never positive, alway negative......

Now please back to the bitching!!

Unsure why you are replying to me, becuase I don't own what is said by all the other posters and most of the time, people are hammering me for supporting WTC doing good things for the sport. I'm just being objective in my posts (good and bad). The swim was shortened a ton, and the bike was long. See my post above about Angela's time....it's is probably a wash in terms of time, but that is irrelevant.

The posts are not directed at the athletes. They are directed at the organizers for knowingly setting up a venue where you can't have a fair race. Full respect to the athletes. They do their best in the box they are given.

That's ST. I'm personally proud of the people who started this race and finished it regardless of the conditions these things are never easy.

But WTC controls the course layout, do they not?

How many races have you seen where the course description indicates that the bike or run course will be determined the day of the race depending on conditions? I've seen any number of triathlons in which the swim (including an ocean swim!) is described exactly like that. Two guesses if the swim is eventually with or against any purported current.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Just a general comment, this board blows up after every race....fist pounding, teeth mashing, pissing and moaning.

You could set a clock by it.....

With everyone competing under the same conditions, what exactly makes it unfair? If the current had been totally shut off and times were increased by 15 to 20 minutes for the pros, would the results have been different?

I get everyone stating the obvious of the swim being easier than most races but not sure how it's unfair.

Agree!!
I had to do 6000' of climbing at Tremblant. I don't think the folks in Florida had to do that, yet I have to hear about everyone's awesome bike splits there... Florida is therefore a BS race!!! ;)

Folks should speak with their wallets. If you don't like the race, don't go.
And, try organizing a race, of any kind, yourself, and see how 'easy' it is to please everyone....

So you find a 10 k that is all down hill, then tell everyone you run xx amount for a 10k. Your logic makes no sense unless you want to tell people what "Your Ironman Time" is and you want the fastest time to tell people. If you are competeing strictly againsy yourself for the best time YOU can do, it simply does not matter

But explain to me 1 thing. Was 2.4 miles?

Jason's example was saying you ran an marathon but only ran 18 miles. I think a better example is saying you ran an marathon when it was simply 100% downhill. You still run 26.2 miles, you don't suddenly only run 20 miles. So isn't that the case here? 2.4 miles is 2.4 miles is it not? How much effort you use or don't use, doesnt mean the correct distance was not covered does it?

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

You did not do Whistler...super well organized, and no moaning after that race. I didn't see much moaning after IM Texas, or Lanzarote, or Nice, or St. Croix, or Savageman, or 70.3 Kansas, or Galveston, or IM Wales....there is an endless list of races that go quite well without any major discussion post race and largely praise. It is totally valid to have a logical discussion about something that was not within the norms of what is generally expected. Ken's choice of thread title is what is getting some people going, and it's not a judgement of the athletes, it is a fair critique of the organizers.

Nope a little different. In a downhill marathon you still take the same amount of steps (approx) to get there. On that swim not so. You could float it. As Jason said a fast swimmer is swimming farther when you look at stroke cnt/dps